@Truthntranspare:
Officials who lie about these pollutants need to be treated like the criminals they are. They knowingly let people suffer and die, when they could prevent the deaths. That is called MURDER. Names, pictures, locations. #ABLeg
We should stop calling it “natural gas”. That is a propaganda term to make it sound natural and good.
Call it 
frac’dmethane instead.
@txsharon.bsky.social:
Yep, I was there on the front lines of the very beginning of the fracking boom.
Seriously fuck you Carl Pope. But also fuck you to a whole lot of other environmental NGO’s that went along.
Extra FUCK YOU to the NGOs that criticized @profbobhowarth.bsky.social
Apology due to all for that harm
My fuck you list is very long.
@ssteingraber1.bsky.social:
Sharon, I knew this was you when I got to the second fuck.
Sending love to you, sister friend, from the Hudson Valley with thanks as always for your good work.
@brooklovesbunnies.bsky.social:
oh wow, read that op-ed yesterday without this context
thanks for sharing
Diogenes New York June 23:
Just a thought: supposing we legislated money out of politics, nullifying Citizens United. Congress and then EPA could regulate the gas & oil industry, no fear of losing a campaign contribution.
Mike Upstate, NY June 23:
@Diogenes
I was once optimistic that Americans might tak climate seriously.
Then? They all went out and bought King Cab Pickup trucks with large gas engines to drive back and forth to the car wash.
Even more so in Alberta
Imagine that.
Ed Mahala New York:
“I think realistically it’s our only hope.”
I’m 63 years old and the planet/environment has only become more toxic in my lifetime. I’ve seen large, beautiful animals lose most of their habitat and population. I’ve seen the human population grow with little concern. The planet is warming because of human activity, and America is living in denial. Humans have little regard for the world, as their population grows the planet will suffer. Realistically? That’s the truth.
Jonathan Penn, Ann Arbor, MI June 23:
Let’s re-state this op-ed for those who may have missed the punch line.
The oil and gas industry, which has known for at least a decade that methane was a significant contributor to global warming and which is making record net profits every year, is not interested in addressing this problem because doing so will not increase profits.
Therefore, we, the people, as in all the people of the planet, should pay to clean up the industry’s mess, in order to save our lives and maintain these profits for the shareholders of oil and gas stocks.
Was their ever a better statement of how capitalism deals with externalities? Was their ever a better statement of the inevitable destruction that capitalism brings in its wake?
And was there ever a better statement of why things will only get worse, because I see no chance that a Republican administration and a Republican Congress will do anything to address this problem in any time frame that will make any difference.
Graph above is a perfect visual of Rape by Capitalism!
Only the rich benefit from global economic growth.
Mike Upstate, NY June 23:
Mr. Pope,
Nobody is going to do anything to change our trajectory.
Nobody is going to clean up the thousands and thousands of leaks at the thousands of wellheads in the USA.
I grew up in Texas and walked all over back then in the 1970’s. Wellheads, all of them, smelled horrible and you could hear them leaking.
Same thing in Pennsylvania and California where I have also seen them in my 5 year job as a Chemical Engineer in the oil industry. I am older now so back then I did not, yet, know about global warming.
But, I can tell you nobody in America cares at all about global warming. No the people. Not the politicians. Nobody.I know some Americans that do care, deeply, and prove it by how they live and work, notably Dr. Steingraber, Dr. Howarth and Dr. Igraffea, Methane Hunter TXsharon, frac harm documentarians, and others, and some that did (and tried to teach politicians the urgency) until they died like Dr. Carl Sagan.
Humans have managed to invent their own extinction project and, all of them, essentially, are completely comfortable knowing that extinction is coming and doing absolutely nothing about it.
But, writing articles that basically almost nobody reads and certainly nobody acts on is still OK.
Erik Frederiksen Asheville, NC:
There is a common misconception that natural gas (largely methane) is a good bridge fuel to reduce coal burninge.g. thanks to frac thugs, Carl Pope, RFK Jr., EDF, Sierra Club et al as we build out renewable energy sources. From the NY Times last year: “It takes as little as 0.2 percent of gas to leak to make natural gas as big a driver of climate change as coal, the study found.” And the leaks are far higher than that.
https://www.nytimes.com/2023/07/13/climate/natural-gas-leaks-coal-climate-change.html
CMink Germany:
@Kevinlyfather: We the people of other countries didn’t get a vote, but have to live with the consequences.
avrds montana:
@Amy
Yes but isn’t he also asking us to pay the oil and gas industry to stop? So we subsidize their drilling and then we pay them to clean up their mess. All because Republicans And democrats and politicians in most parts of the world (owned by polluters) don’t believe in regulations.
There’s something missing in this argument. Democracy perhaps.
Tom Martin Los Gatos, CA:
Wait a minute! We need to focus on methane so we can continue to pump and transport oil and natural gas with minimal methane emissions??? Seems to me that if we moved away from using oil and natural gas in the first place that would go a long way to solving both our methane and carbon dioxide emission problems.
@nigelb.bsky.social:
There are so many ways that the GoA controls the Alberta Energy Regulator whether through appointments to its board (eg Yager) or issuing increasingly specific directives.
In this case directing removal of a bulletin limiting solution gas flaring. Zero reasons. Zero independence.
@beachmagoo.bsky.social:
Alberta wells leaking 7 X the amount of methane measured. So the AER cancels directive for industry to stop methane leaks.
AT Idaho:
Here’s what you and almost every so called environmental group got wrong and continue to get wrong. The politically difficult but single most important part of the climate change equation and in fact every environmental issue, human over population. To pretend that the U.S. or planet will make any sustainable progress without addressing the underlying cause of virtually every environmental problem we face is the height of delusion and political correctness. Since the first earth day in 1970 the U.S. has added 150 million more people. The planet has added 4.3 billion people in the same time period. It’s not an accident that 60% of all GHG emissions have occurred since 1990. CO2 in the same time period has gone from 354 ppm to 430 and is headed no where but higher. To ignore these spectacular numbers and continue to tell us that EVs and solar and wind farms will get us anywhere near sustainability while population continues to soar is beyond dishonest.
And don’t start with the nonsense of birthrates are falling. The population of most countries, especially those in the 3rd world are so young, that with immigration, it will be decades, if ever, before any expected fall in numbers. Meanwhile, even the NYTs calls for a higher birthrate. Insanity, given what the current population is doing to the planet.
duncanwrites.bsky.social:
Carl Pope hid the fact that he took tens of millions of dollars from gas companies from the Sierra Club board because he knew it was wrong, even at the time. This is a joke.
@ssteingraber1.bsky.social:
Yes, that’s the simple truth.
@jenkrill.bsky.social:
On Monday, Carl Pope told the world that he “made a mistake” by supporting methane gas in 2005. In the 20 years since, communities have suffered from the fracking boom and we lost decades in the battle against climate change.
Dr. Sandra Steingraber @ssteingraber1.bsky.social:
No words for how infuriated this mea culpa from Carl Pope (former CEO @sierraclub.org) makes me feel. We openly shared with SC data on methane leaks from fracking while SC was secretly accepting $millions from the gas industry.
Seriously fuck you.I second that 1000 times!
In Feb 2012 Time magazine broke the story that Sierra Club had accepted > $25 million from the gas industry, mostly from Aubrey McClendon, CEO of Chesapeake Energy, “one of the biggest gas drilling companies in the U.S. and a firm heavily involved in fracking.”
That same month, I wrote a blog about the real harm that SC’s decision was wreaking on both climate and public health in Pennsylvania.
Huff Post refused to run it but Orion did.*
(*NB the date stamp is wrong. This was published in March 2012.)
By 2011, the data from Tony Ingraffea and @profbobhowarth.bsky.social lab on methane’s underappreciated role in crashing the climate and fracking’s role in the ongoing surge of global methane emissions were solid. All three of us testified and gave briefings in DC on the harms of nat gas.
When we banned fracking in NYS in 2014, there were already 400 studies in the peer-reviewed literature showing harms and risks. Today: 2,500+ studies. Here’s whole monograph of the damning evidence It’s been the focus of my research for 13 yrs.
concernedhealthny.org/compendium/
Carl Pope and @sierraclub actively chose to ignore the science for years. And SC undermined efforts to ban fracking in Illinois. Other big green groups are also complicit but these are the three men I personallyMe too, along with Canada’s corrupt Sierra Club and other frac pimping and lying NGOs and politicians and regulators here (they also worked hard to try to discredit my frac research and warnings, and harm my lawsuit, serving their big donors: Alberta gov’t, AER, Encana etc.) blame for enabling the fracking boom, which has allowed the fossil fuel party to rock on and which thousands of uncorrupted citizen activists and scientists and have worked so hard and so long to oppose:
Carl Pope, Sierra Club
Fred Krup, EDFOne of the sleaziest harmful NGOs out there!
Barack Obama
Oh and I’ll add gas-invested billionaire Michael Bloomberg to this list. His Beyond Coal philanthropy has provided a green cover for fracking, and as mayor of NYC he opposed our efforts to win a statewide fracking ban. Which we won anyway.
@esgarchitect.bsky.social:
Thank you for your years of research, and this powerful thread.
After being alerted around 2022, I do not use “natural gas”. I insist on calling it fossil gas, methane gas, or gas. There’s nothing natural about it after it is mining, processed, and transported.
@meetinghouse.bsky.social:
‘Fracked methane’
@ssteingraber1.bsky.social:
Here’s the 2012 Time Magazine expose. Sierra Club only stopped accepting gas industry money once it learned that Time was going out with this:
Exclusive: How the Sierra Club Took Millions From the Natural Gas Industry—and Why They Stopped by Bryan Walsh, Feb. 02, 2012, Time
Mainstream environmental groups have struggled to find the right line on shale natural gas and the hydraulic fracturing or fracking process. Gas has a much smaller carbon footprint than coal—according to most scientists—and produces far fewer air pollutants. That was enough for many major green groups to give support to gas as a “bridge fuel” to a cleaner energy future—the next best domestic alternative to coal as an electricity source while alternatives like wind and solar scaled up. But for grassroots members of those groups—especially in parts of the country where fracking was already underway—the risk of local pollution wasn’t worth the national and global climate benefits of greater gas consumption, especially as media and scientific attention on the potential threats to water supplies grew. It was a major challenge for environmental leaders: how to balance local concerns about traditional pollution with planet-sized worries over climate change, and how to work with corporate America without being seen as selling out.
Now the biggest and oldest environmental group in the U.S. finds itself caught on the horns of that dilemma. TIME has learned that between 2007 and 2010 the Sierra Club accepted over $25 million in donations from the gas industry, mostly from Aubrey McClendon, CEO of Chesapeake Energy—one of the biggest gas drilling companies in the U.S. and a firm heavily involved in fracking—to help fund the Club’s Beyond Coal campaign. Though the group ended its relationship with Chesapeake in 2010—and the Club says it turned its back on an additional $30 million in promised donations—the news raises concerns about influence industry may have had on the Sierra Club’s independence and its support of natural gas in the past. It’s also sure to anger ordinary members who’ve been uneasy about the Club’s relationship with corporations. “The chapter groups and volunteers depend on the Club to have their back as they fight pollution from any industry, and we need to be unrestrained in our advocacy,” Michael Brune, the Sierra Club’s executive director since 2010, told me. “The first rule of advocacy is that you shouldn’t take money from industries and companies you’re trying to change.”
The news of the gas industry donation—which had been kept anonymous until now, as many of Club’s gifts from individuals and corporations are—is particularly worrisome for the Sierra Club because its former executive director Carl Pope had been vocal in supporting natural gas as an alternative to coal. Pope—a lifelong Sierra Club staffer who served as executive director and then chairman before stepping down late last year—accompanied Chesapeake’s McClendon in 2009 on trips promoting the benefits of natural gas over coal, even as millions of dollars of McClendon’s money was flowing to Sierra Club anonymously. (Pope didn’t respond to email requests for comment.) In early 2008 Pope told the industry publication Oil & Gas Investor:
Use renewables as much as we can. Natural gas is the next-cleanest fuel, then we have oil and then we have coal… We’re trying to make sure that we innovatively and creatively use whatever fuel we burn (and) that we rely primarily on the fuels that are the cleanest… And, among the fossil fuels, natural gas is at the top.
It’s worth noting that Pope was hardly alone among environmental leaders at the time in seeing gas as a good alternative in the larger climate fight against coal. Environmentalist Robert F. Kennedy Jr. wrote in 2009 that “the giant advantage of a quick conversion from coal to gas is the quickest route for jump-starting our economy and saving our planet,” and that while gas had environmental caveats, “those impacts are dwarfed by the disastrous holocaust of coal and can be mitigated by careful regulation.” At the time, fracking wasn’t really on the environmental radar.
But as fracking intensified and coverage of the possible environmental impacts of drilling expanded, the gap between grassroots members and the national environmental leadership grew. People in Pennsylvania or New York state who worried—rightly or wrongly—whether their water was safe to drink weren’t pacified by the fact that gas doing less damage to the climate and the air than coal. “There was a lot of grassroots sensitivity on this at the local level,” says Brune—and they made their concerns known.
At the same time the tenor of environmental politics was changing. At the end of the Bush years and the beginning of Obama’s term, mainstream environmental groups reached out to big corporations as never before, creating partnerships. The hope was to make industry greener from within—rather than always confronting corporations from the outside—and build a powerful political coalition that could push through major climate legislation. But that effort finally floundered in 2010 when the Senate failed to act on the climate bill, while mainstream green groups came under attack for being too close to corporations—including the Sierra Club, which received flak for inking a $1.3 million deal in 2008 with Clorox to endorse the company’s Green Works brand of environmentally-friendly cleaning products.
It was during that transition that the Sierra Club brought in Brune at the beginning of 2010 to serve as the new executive director. (Pope became chairman.) Brune came from the much more confrontational Rainforest Action Network—known for its direct protest and acts of civil disobedience—and he says that when he discovered the natural gas donation, he knew it risked tainting the organization. According to a Sierra Club memo in August 2010, a few months after Brune took over, he recommended to the board that the Club break financial ties with Chesapeake immediately, refusing the additional $30 million that he now says had been verbally promised to the group. Brune wrote:
The size and secrecy of surrounding CHK’s [Chesapeake] gifts has prevented us from having an open and candid relationship with our supporters. It’s vital that we act with integrity.
Financially, the decision was tough, especially since it came at a time when donations have been hard to come by for NGOs, and the club had to pare back on staff without the money. But the Sierra Club board ultimately agreed, as board chairman Robin Mann wrote in a memo in September 2010:
The Club continues to view natural gas as a flawed but necessary transition fuel to a clean energy future powered by wind, solar and other truly clean energy sources. That’s all the more reason that we must even more aggressively push for strong state and federal regulations. To succeed in those efforts, there can be no question of our independence. We can no longer accept donations from companies or individuals involved in the natural gas industry.
Brune says that the gift came with no strings attached, and that the money didn’t push the Club to promote natural gas or downplay its potential environmental impacts. But he also knows that even if that is true, it’s besides the point. The damage was already done. “The [additional] money would have been a quarter of our budget for an entire year,” he says. “It wasn’t just a throwaway check. But there were clear reasons why we needed to do that.”
For its part, Chesapeake says the decision to end the funding was mutual. Company spokesperson Jim Gipson told me:
Back in 2007, Chesapeake and the Sierra Club had a shared interest in moving our nation toward a clean energy future based on the expanded use of natural gas, especially in the power sector. We mutually agreed in 2010 to end our funding.
Over the years, Chesapeake has been proud to support a number of organizations that share our interest in clean air and agree that America’s abundant supplies of clean natural gas represent the most affordable, available and scalable fuel to power a more prosperous and environmentally responsible future for our country.
For his part, Brune says the decision was made by Sierra alone. It does raise the question of why—more than a year and a half after the decision to cut financial ties with the gas industry was made—Brune is talking about this so urgently now. He says that he’s concerned by the prominence that natural gas and oil drilling received in President Obama’s recent State of the Union speech, when Obama said that gas drilling would “create jobs and power trucks and factories that are cleaner and cheaper, proving that we don’t have to choose between our environment and our economy.” Brune isn’t convinced. “The Club needs to come out strong and clear and advocate more fiercely to use as little gas as possible,” he says. “We’re not going to mute our voice on this.”
Still, Brune knows that the Club will take a PR hit now that the news of the Chesapeake money is out—and that ordinary members may feel betrayed. “I didn’t sleep that well last night,” he admits. For now the Sierra Club will keep pushing forward with its Beyond Coal campaign—which was bolstered by a (not anonymous) $50 million gift from New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg last year—and will intensify its work on natural gas, standing with other environmental groups to call for much tougher regulation of shale gas drilling and fracking. That’s likely to lead to a more confrontational posture than the one Brune’s predecessor took—he’s already made it clear that the deal with Clorox won’t be renewed. “It doesn’t mean that there won’t be relationships with corporations,” says Brune. “But there will be that sensitivity to grassroots concerns.”
Between Occupy Wall Street and the Keystone protests, this isn’t the best time for any environmental group to trumpet its corporate ties. And Brune is right that both the size—and more importantly, the secrecy—of the gift would have made it impossible to see the Sierra Club as an honest broker on natural gas, just as environmentalists criticize politicians who take fossil fuel money. Still, I wouldn’t give up on seeking cooperation with industry on these issues, just as I wouldn’t give up on natural gas as a better and cleaner alternative to coal in the short term, provided it’s well regulated. It feels good and righteous to be among the grassroots, but a threat as vast as climate change needs bigger solutions, as Pope himself told the Los Angeles Times when he stepped down late last year:
I’m a big-tent guy. We’re not going to save the world if we rely only on those who agree with the Sierra Club. There aren’t enough of them. My aim is getting it right for the long term. I can’t get anything accomplished if people think: ‘This guy is not an honest broker. He’s with the Sierra Club.’
The Sierra Club took a step towards honesty. The question may be whether it can still be that kind of broker—or whether it still wants to be.
Update (6:46 PM 2/02/12): In response to the TIME piece, Brune posted a message on the Sierra Club blog explaining the decisions on the Chesapeake donations:
It’s time to stop thinking of natural gas as a “kinder, gentler” energy source. What’s more, we do not have an effective regulatory system in this country to address the risks that gas drilling poses on our health and communities. The scope of the problems from under-regulated drilling, as well as a clearer understanding of the total carbon pollution that results from both drilling and burning gas, have made it plain that, as we phase out coal, we need to leapfrog over gas whenever possible in favor of truly clean energy. Instead of rushing to see how quickly we can extract natural gas, we should be focusing on how to be sure we are using less — and safeguarding our health and environment in the meantime.
What Environmentalists Like Me Got Wrong About Climate Change by Carl Pope, Money grubbing Frac Pimp for Rape by Capitalism, June 23, 2025, NYT
Mr. Pope is a clean energy policy adviser to several foundations and was the executive director of the Sierra Club from 1992 to 2010.
In my 50 years in the environmental movement, the decision I most regret is one I made in 2005. As the executive director of the Sierra Club, I decided the organization should largely ignore methane, a potent greenhouse gas, and focus on carbon dioxide, the most prevalent heat-trapping gas in the atmosphere and a byproduct of burning fossil fuels like coal, oil and gas.
My colleagues and I understood that methane, which comes from man-made and natural sources, would eventually have to be curbed to slow climate change. But the data suggested that it was a relatively minor contributor to global warming and could wait.fucking liar! (It’s also been found that man-made methane, eg, fossil fuel exploitation, causes more methane emissions than natural)
And so I neglected methane for decades, as did many climate regulators, activists and negotiators.ya, those corrupted by big frac money, ego, and lust to knowingly abuse aquifers, ordinary families and communities via oil and gas in exchange for big salaries. Canada has the same dirty dregs of NGOs here, greedy corrupt people claiming to be saints while helping frac’ers poisoning us, and worked hard trying to control my voice. Hideous gang. Sierra Club even played one of my public talks in a BC movie theatre on the many harms done to me, and my community, for them to make money. The corrupt fuckers never asked my permission first, did not even notify me, and made as though I was presenting in person at that even (I found out about the sleazy event by citizens emailing me, telling me they were going to attend and were so excited to be see me). NGOs continue to enable the frac harms for their big money masters. It’s inhumane
It wasn’t until three years ago that I came to see the gravity of my mistake: that methane is an urgent problem and that one source of it is a relatively low-hanging fruit in the fight against climate change. Methane traps about 80 times as much heat in the atmosphere as carbon dioxide over 20 years. And methane emissions, which are driving an estimated 45 percent of human-caused warming, are rising rapidly.
I now believe that cleaning up methane leaks from the production and shipping of oil and gas — one of the most significant sources of these emissions — is the best hope we have to avoid triggering some of the most consequential climate tipping points in the next decade.too late you rape enabler!I think realistically it is our only hope.
The reason the next decade is so crucial is that several natural systems may be on the brink of irreversible change. For example, if warming causes an acceleration in permafrost melt, large swaths of Alaska and Canada could be rendered uninhabitable.Ya, thanks to your greed and ego and EDF’s, Sierra Club’s et al! If warming forces a large Antarctic ice shelf to break loose, then much of Florida and many other coastal regions could be flooded. We need to slow global warming in time to prevent such catastrophes, and cutting methane emissions is the best, quickest way to do so.You knew that long ago, you douche fucker traitor to earth’s creatures, atmosphere, water and the many many families, including me, you helped criminal frac’ers rape and poison
Oil and gas wells leak methane at the wellhead and in the processing and transport of these fossil fuels. But the gas is relatively easy and cheap to recover.More lies!! It is not easy, it’s impossible to fully stop leaks and expensive. Wells also leak many other places than the wellhead, frac’d gases can contaminate aquifers and travel miles within them, and frac’s can destroy the caprock causing gases to rise to surface far from the wellbore!
When we seal leaks, the atmospheric concentration of methane declines, and we limit warming, making it one of the best bangs for our buck.WTF! More lies! Industry has known for decades their shoddy workmanship leaks masses of gasses, that frac’ing makes those leaks much worse, that leaks are impossible to stop fully and permanently, and expensive to try to stop. And worse, when companies are ordered go back in long after a well was shut to fix leakers putting people’s lives at risk in their homes in towns, they make the leaks worse! What oil and gas company out there likes to spend money mitigating their endless leaks and pollution, if even possible? I know of none. The only way to mitigation methane pollution from oil and gas wells, is not to drill, and not to frac.
Slides above from Ernst presentations
The oil and gas industry can afford to clean up its leaks, and by the end of 2023, companies producing nearly half the world’s oil signed a pledge to reach near-zero methane emissions by 2030. Net Zero is impossible in the oil and gas industry – except by shutting it down, completely. Industry fucking knows it. And, I’ve yet to see an oil or gas company, or service company, keep their many pledges, signed or not and no politico or regulator will make them. Even if they could do net zero, why wait five more fucking years? But they are moving much too slowly. The only way to incentivize them to move faster and to get every single company on board is for governments to pay for their cleanup costsWTF!!!!!? Mr. Traitor Pope, Climate leader or Lobbyist for polluters? Are you working for Alberta’s corrupt polluter-enabling oil and gas lobbyist Premier, Danielle Smith? That’s what she’s been spewing the last few years, that we citizens – who profited nothing but harms from being frac’d – ought to pay billion dollar profiting industry to clean up even though laws in USA and Canada require companies to pay for their clean up NOT the citizenry. Fucking douche you are just like Smith and for buyers to purchase only certified low-leakage gas.
Governments worldwide and U.S. states committed ahhhh, there’s that wonder word! Polluters’ and their enablers’ favourite gateway to more polluting! What oil gas or frac company do you know has kept one commitment? I know of none. to climate action will need to sway the oil industry to protect the world from climate chaos.Too late, billions are already suffering horrifically with many dying terrible deaths; millions have watched their homes, communities, businesses, farms destroyed in front of them, with little to no assistance (because rich companies and their enablers like you get all the money and now you want to make us give them more!)In exchange for sealing leaks, companies should get preferential access to markets.This is a synergy piece, a pollution and frac pimping piece by Mr. Pope, nothing else but more enabling Rape by Capitalism. How much did Trump Regime/RFK Jr pay you and the NYT for this harmful shite?
It’s not fair to pay rich oil companies to clean up their pollution, but it’s essential to get the job done fast.It won’t work you douche. In Canada, the federal and provincial gov’ts gave billions of public money to polluters years ago to clean up; most took the money and ran and cleaned up a few token farts To date, efforts have relied primarily on diplomacy and common sense, but they have proved too slow. Payoffs work faster.They do not work, at all. I bet you know it.
Methane emissions come from surprising places. Researchers estimate that roughly half of those in U.S. oil fields come from wells that don’t produce significant amounts of oil or gas. Their owners often rely on equipment that is in disrepair or are just trying to avoid the costs of properly sealing them and shutting them down. We need to make it worth their while to act quickly.Are you with the Mob? Companies are making $billions in profits and stealing $billions more from investors, while walking from cleanup. They’ve had $billions in profits for incentives for decades and what did they clean up? What leaks did they fix? Little to nothing
A big source of methane emissions is the venting and flaring of gas at oil wells that don’t have pipeline connections to capture it.
But there are tools that can help. Installing an electric actuator on a pipeline canbut won’t prevent leaks and costs only about $3,500. This canbut won’t save enough methane a year to equal up to 33 barrels of oil. The recovered methane can but won’t because you Carl, RFK Jr and your cruel asses helped this industry profit rape and pollute with impunity, why the fuck would the polluters change their criminal behaviour now? be sold as natural gas.
In the Trump era, the U.S. government almost certainly won’t be helpful in this cleanup effort. The key players are methane consumers and importers: states such as New York, Illinois, Colorado and California and countries such as Japan, South Korea and those in the European Union. They should subsidizeWTF!! The industry is already heavily subsidized. Carl, you are shouting for them to get more freebies. Go Fuck a Frac! the oil industry to start aggressive cleanup of methane leaks inwhy not in 2025? If you are in such a fucking hurry, why give them another half a year of escape from the law? 2026 and 2027 and ensure that gas coming into their economies is certified to have next to no methane emissions.How the hell is the industry going to fix the millions of leaks to surface via frac’s far from the well bore? Or the damages caused by frac quakes and waste injection quakes?
Gas and oil produced with emissions need to be subject to fees, which can pay for loans for cleanup. Why loans? Why not out of their billions in profits? Carl is cheering from the centre of a circle jerk with polluters That gives the oil industry both the funds to plug the leaks and the market incentives to keep their pipelines and ships that transport liquefied frac’d natural toxic gas clean.
With each passing year, extreme weather does more damage to human communities. We are in an emergency now, and we must carry out the reforms that climate leadersleader? You are no leader, you are a used condom flung across the room inside out like me should have prioritized years ago.
Refer also to:
2025: Billions In Subsidies Flow To LNG Canada As Kitimat Terminal Nears Launch
2024: Sulfolane, health-harming sour gas sweetener, used *intentionally* for decades by oil and gas industry, found in groundwater in “large contaminant plumes across Canada, specifically in Alberta.” Companies *intentionally* dumped it into aquifers with families and cattle poisoned, bullied and *intentionally* gagged by lawyers years ago. Now researchers say it’s emerging and accidental. FFS.You expect us to trust this fucking evil lying abusive raping industry to clean up and want to make us pay them to rape us more?
… Natural gas’s advocate
McClendon tried to change the gas drilling industry’s relationship with the environmental community. He painted a green stripe into Chesapeake’s logo and pushed for gas to be recognized as cleaner-burning than gasoline, diesel or coal. He even toured the country in 2009 with then-Sierra Club chief Carl Pope.
He drove the creation of America’s Natural Gas Alliance, or ANGA, and the American Clean Skies Foundation, which put millions of dollars into making the nature-friendly case for natural gas. As McClendon toured with Pope, Chesapeake quietly gave millions of dollars to the Sierra Club.
His advocacy gave gas producers a seat at the table at a time when legislation to curb climate change seemed likely to pass on Capitol Hill. He also challenged the petroleum industry’s allegiance to the Republican Party by saying he had voted for Obama for president.
Shale drilling comes with numerous downsides for people who live near well sites. Drilling rigs typically run 24 hours a day for as long as a month, and each well requires hundreds, sometimes thousands, of truck trips. The fracking process uses millions of gallons of water, sand and chemicals to break up — or fracture — the rock formation to release the oil and gas trapped inside.
The drilling boom has been linked to air pollution and sporadic cases of water pollution. The cycle produces millions of barrels of salty, chemically tainted wastewater that has to be disposed of. The disposal operations have been linked to earthquakes in Texas, Arkansas, Ohio and Oklahoma.
…
2015:
New University of Guelph study on methane migration in sand aquifer in Ontario: “Potentially explosive methane gas leaking from energy wells may travel extensively through groundwater and pose a safety risk”How much money shall we give the fucking frac’ers to fix this Carl? All in the world give up our daily bread for them? The polluters still wouldn’t fix it. The harms you, RFK Jr., Sierra Club, Pembina Institute, Council of Canadians etc. loudly pimped, are not repairable!
2007:
2006: International Well Bore Integrity Workshop Key Conclusion:
“There is clearly a problem with well bore integrity in existing oil and gas production wells, worldwide…”
2006: Hey Carl, How much money do we donate to billion dollar profit rapist Encana/Ovintiv to repair the fresh water aquifers in my community the company illegally frac’d, repeatedly in 2001 and 2004? How much shall I donate to the rich douches to repair my well water shown in photo below, after Encana’s illegal fracs into the aquifers that supply my well? Instead of even trying to repair the damages caused, or our regulator ordering them to, the company cowardly changed names, and ran away to the USA after covering up their illegal aquifer frac’ing wells near my home
1990’s:
1980’s:
Slides from Ernst presentations